Kimi K2.6 vs Qwen3.5 27B
Wins 6 of 8 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Math · Long documents
Wins 0 of 8 areas
—
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper.
Scores updated · 42 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software70Kimi K2.67 of 7 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Kimi K2.63 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up30Kimi K2.63 of 3 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video30Kimi K2.63 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Kimi K2.63 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Kimi K2.61 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own22Even2 each · 1 tie
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked00Even0 each · 1 tie
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3.5 27B costs 45% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Kimi K2.6 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+41points ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+25.3points ahead
- Completes tasks by operating a computer desktopOSWorld-Verified+16.9points ahead
Where Qwen3.5 27B pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+6points ahead
- Finds the root cause of IT system incidentsAA IT-Bench SRE+4.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 42 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingKimi K2.6
- LMArena · WebDevKimi K2.6 by 152 rating points15091357+152 rating
- SciCodeKimi K2.6 by 1251.539.5+12
- Terminal-Bench HardKimi K2.6 by 11.343.932.6+11.3
- LiveCodeBench v6Kimi K2.6 by 8.989.680.7+8.9
- SWE-bench VerifiedKimi K2.6 by 7.880.272.4+7.8
- SWE-bench MultilingualKimi K2.6 by 7.476.769.3+7.4
- SWE-bench ProKimi K2.6 by 7.458.651.2+7.4
AgentsEven
- BrowseCompKimi K2.6 by 25.386.361+25.3
- OSWorld-VerifiedKimi K2.6 by 16.973.156.2+16.9
- GDPValQwen3.5 27B by 62733+6
- AA IT-Bench SREQwen3.5 27B by 4.331.235.5+4.3
- MCP Atlastie68.168.4tie
ReasoningKimi K2.6
- Humanity's Last ExamKimi K2.6 by 13.637.523.9+13.6
- CritPtKimi K2.6 by 7.180.9+7.1
- GPQA DiamondKimi K2.6 by 5.391.185.8+5.3
FactsKimi K2.6
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationKimi K2.6 by 4159.518.5+41
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyKimi K2.6 by 11.932.620.7+11.9
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterKimi K2.6 by 1.310.812.1+1.3
Images and chartsKimi K2.6
- CharXiv (RQ)Kimi K2.6 by 7.286.779.5+7.2
- MMMU-ProKimi K2.6 by 4.479.475+4.4
- LMArena · VisionKimi K2.6 by 42 rating points12821240+42 rating
MathKimi K2.6
- HMMT Feb. 2026Kimi K2.6 by 11.692.781.1+11.6
- IMOAnswerBenchKimi K2.6 by 6.18679.9+6.1
- AIME 2026Kimi K2.6 by 4.796.491.7+4.7
Other results16 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceKimi K2.6 by 49.35.3-44+49.3
- Claw Eval (pass@3)Kimi K2.6 by 34.780.946.2+34.7
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3.5 27B by 32.522.154.6+32.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexKimi K2.6 by 26.961.834.9+26.9
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Kimi K2.6 by 25.166.741.6+25.1
- BabyVisionKimi K2.6 by 23.968.544.6+23.9
- OJBenchKimi K2.6 by 20.560.640.1+20.5
- WideSearchKimi K2.6 by 19.780.861.1+19.7
- MCPMarkKimi K2.6 by 19.655.936.3+19.6
- MATH-VisionKimi K2.6 by 7.293.286+7.2
- AA IntelligenceKimi K2.6 by 4.12722.9+4.1
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthKimi K2.6 by 22.3 rating points116.794.4+22.3 rating
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Kimi K2.6 by 295.993.9+2
- vectara_factual_consistencyKimi K2.6 by 1.389.287.9+1.3
- MMLU-ProKimi K2.6 by 187.186.1+1
- vectara_answer_ratetie99.799.8tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or Qwen3.5 27B?
Kimi K2.6 wins six of the eight areas we test: coding, reasoning, facts, images and charts, math and long documents. Qwen3.5 27B wins none, but costs 45% less. They are level on agents and following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
Kimi K2.6. It wins 7 of the 7 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 27B wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Kimi K2.6 costs $0.95 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3.5 27B about 45% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 42 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 26 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 16 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.